State-of-the-science workshop report: Issues and approaches in low-dose-response extrapolation for environmental health risk assessment

Environmental Health Perspectives

Volumn 117, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 283-287

  White, Ronald H ^a   Cote, Ila ^b   Zeise, Lauren ^c   Fox, Mary ^a   Dominici, Francesca ^a   Burke, Thomas A ^a   White, Paul D ^b   Hattis, Dale B ^d   Samet, Jonathan M ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^c CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^d CLARK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Dose response function; Environmental health; Low dose entrapolation; Risk assessment; Workshop report

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; HEALTH HAZARD; HUMAN; ORGANIZATION; POLLUTANT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL MODEL; UNCERTAINTY; UNITED STATES; WORKSHOP;

DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS; MARYLAND; NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 59349119247     PISSN: 00916765     EISSN: 15529924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1289/ehp.11502     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Boobis AR, Cohen SM, Dellarco V, McGregor D, Meek ME, Vickers C, et al. 2006. IPCS framework for analyzing the relevance of a cancer mode of action for humans. Crit Rev Toxicol 36:781-792.
2. Guyton KZ, Barone S Jr, Brown RC, Euling SY, Jinot J, Makris S. 2008. Mode of action frameworks: a critical analysis. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev 11(1):16-31.
3. Hattis D, Chu M, Rahmioglu N, Goble R, Verma P, Hartman K, Kozlak M. A preliminary operational classification system for non-mutagenic modes of action for carcinogenesis. Crit Rev Toxicol 2008 Nov 13:1. [Epub ahead of print]
4. Hill AB. 1965. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc R Soc Med 58:295-300.
5. IPCS. 2006. IPCS Harmonization Project: Report of the Meeting to Extend the IPCS Cancer Framework to Other Endpoints, 30-31 March 2006, Geneva, CH. Geneva:International Programme on Chemical Safety.
6. Lutz WK. 1990. Dose-response relationship and low dose extrapolation in chemical carcinogenesis. Carcinogenesis 11(8):1243-1247.
7. Lutz WK. 2001. Susceptibility differences in chemical carcinogenesis linearize the dose-response relationship: threshold doses can be defined only for individuals. Mutat Res 482:71-76.
8. Lutz WK, Gaylor DW, Conolly RB, Lutz RW. 2005. Nonlinearity and thresholds in dose-response relationships for carcinogenicity due to sampling variation, logarithmic dose scaling, or small differences in individual susceptibility. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 207(2 suppl):565-569.
9. Meek ME, Bucher JR, Cohen SM, Dellarco V, Hill RN, LehmanMcKeeman LD, et al. 2003. A framework for human relevance analysis of information on carcinogenic modes of action. Crit Rev Toxicol 33(6):591-653.
10. Meier KL, Bailer AJ, Portier CJ. 1993. A measure of tumorigenic potency incorporating dose-response shape. Biometrics 49(3):917-926.
11. NRC (National Research Council). 1983. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
12. NRC (National Research Council). 1999. Health Effects of Exposure to Radon: BEIR VI. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
13. NRC (National Research Council). 2005. Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
14. Portier C. 2000. Risk ranges for various endpoints following exposure to 2,3,7,8-TCDD. Food Addit Contam 17(4):335-346.
15. Raftery AE, Madigan D, Hoeting JA. 1997. Bayesian model averaging for linear regression models. J Am Stat Assoc 92:179-191.
16. Rothman K, Greenland S. 2008. Modern Epidemiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia:Lippincott.
17. U.S. DHHS. 2004. The Health Consequences of Smoking: A Report of the Surgeon General. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
18. U.S. EPA. 2004. An Examination of EPA Risk Assessment Principles and Practices. EPA/100/B-04/001. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
19. U.S. EPA. 2005. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment. EPA/630/P-03/ 001B. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
20. U.S. EPA. 2006a. Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants. EPA/600/R-05/004aF, Vol 1. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
21. U. S. EPA. 2006b. Provisional Assessment of Recent Studies on Health Effects of Particulate Matter Exposure. EPA/600/R-06/063. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
22. U.S. EPA. 2006c. Air Quality Criteria for Lead. EPA/600/R5/144aF, Vol 1., Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
23. U.S. EPA. 2008a. Integrated Science Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen. EPA/600/R-08/071. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
24. U.S. EPA. 2008b. Integrated Science Assessment for Sulfur Oxides. EPA/ 600/R-08/047. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.